15.295 imagination and the unsettled

From: by way of Willard McCarty (willard@lists.village.Virginia.EDU)
Date: Sat Oct 06 2001 - 02:21:52 EDT

  • Next message: by way of Willard McCarty: "15.296 documentary editing guide? Mac note-keeping?"

                   Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 15, No. 295.
           Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London

             Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2001 07:14:43 +0100
             From: Wendell Piez <wapiez@mulberrytech.com>
             Subject: imagination

    Hey Willard,

    I'm only now (he shamefully admits) catching up on a few old HUMANIST posts.

    At 01:57 AM 9/17/01, you wrote:
    >The problem is this: what are the powers of mind we most need in humanities
    >computing and how do we learn to cultivate them?

    You really must check out the work of Owen Barfield. (I think I mentioned
    it to you last June.) You could start with his underground classic, *Poetic
    Diction*. Even more provocative and far-reaching is *Saving the Appearances*.

    Steve Talbott, publisher of the NETFUTURE newsletter, has an extended gloss
    (viz. 'polemic') that riffs from Barfield in his book *The Future Does Not
    Compute*, an insider's critique of the abstracting mentality (which works
    side by side and hand in hand with imagination). Talbott can be a bit
    ponderous and tendentious (although he's always been very nice to me!), but
    I think this is understandable given the context in which he wrote
    (mid-90s) and the weight of the topic.

    Also, you should know, if you don't already, Weizenbaum's *Computer Power
    and Human Reason*. Remember, he was the developer of ELIZA (and rather
    taken aback, as he tells the story, by how much trust she met with).

    In a later post, you ask:

    >My question is this: how do we introduce our students, in humanities
    >computing, to the complex and treacherous domain that lies between data and
    >our representations of reality on the machine? How do we jolt them out of
    >the common-sense view that these representations are purely and simply

    Isn't that the problem of education itself, all the way back to Socrates
    and Plato's Dialogues? (Socrates' mission being one essentially of asking
    his friends to reason based not on the truisms they were told, but on their
    own powers of observation and logic.)

    I do know that in my case, the moment of truth was when, in some advanced
    year of grad study, it became plain that *everything* I was reading --
    literature, criticism, critical theory -- was equally rhetoric (though
    making different kinds of claims). This was well after my Dad had warned me
    (I think I was about six) that I couldn't believe something just because
    someone had put it in a book. (I remember being shocked that someone would
    place something they did not know to be true within the sacred precincts of
    a book binding.)

    In any case, I don't think this is a lesson easily learned. And my
    intuition tells me that there is no formula to guarantee its transmission,
    only moments of enlightenment and, for the fortunate, the recognition and
    validation from someone senior that that insight is genuine.

    Which is not to say it can't be encouraged. As for that, my feeling is that
    the best way to teach that, for example, the video medium cannot be taken
    at face value (as every night's news show asks us to), is to give the
    student a video camera and ask them to produce (and then reflect on that
    production). Working in an archive is a wonderful antidote, for those not
    mortally ill, to the disease of historical certainty.


    Wendell Piez mailto:wapiez@mulberrytech.com
    Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com
    17 West Jefferson Street Direct Phone: 301/315-9635
    Suite 207 Phone: 301/315-9631
    Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 301/315-8285
        Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Oct 06 2001 - 02:30:48 EDT